Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Who Was Adam? A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man by Hugh Ross
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Dragar" data-source="post: 32239682" data-attributes="member: 24534"><p>I'm referring to the literal interpretation as used by, but not limited to, YECs.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The Bible says 'rabbits chew their cud', the Bible says "he could see all four corners of the Earth", the Bible says "the Sun was stopped in the sky", the Bible says God created the Earth in a number of days, and so on and so forth. So on face value it appears the Bible has a great deal in error. Unless you interpret it differently (see below).</p><p> </p><p></p><p></p><p>This is one of the more sensible views to take. But bear in mind that it is <em>obvious</em> now that anything in the Bible is true, because if you find a contradiction with reality you change your interpretation to match reality. </p><p></p><p>I applaud you for doing so, but you need to realise that it makes it utterly unsurprising the Bible appears to never be wrong - the same could be said of <em>any</em> book if a similar approach was taken for its interpretation. </p><p></p><p>You can either interpret the Bible as it appears and find it is in error, or interpret the Bible in light of science and find that it is, <em>unremarkably</em>, consistent with our knowledge of the world. Perhaps worse, if the Bible appears to be in error without science to show you <em>how</em> to interpret it, perhaps you should be wary about drawing conclusions using the Bible when you have no science to guide you in what it is talking about.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Dragar, post: 32239682, member: 24534"] I'm referring to the literal interpretation as used by, but not limited to, YECs. The Bible says 'rabbits chew their cud', the Bible says "he could see all four corners of the Earth", the Bible says "the Sun was stopped in the sky", the Bible says God created the Earth in a number of days, and so on and so forth. So on face value it appears the Bible has a great deal in error. Unless you interpret it differently (see below). This is one of the more sensible views to take. But bear in mind that it is [I]obvious[/I] now that anything in the Bible is true, because if you find a contradiction with reality you change your interpretation to match reality. I applaud you for doing so, but you need to realise that it makes it utterly unsurprising the Bible appears to never be wrong - the same could be said of [I]any[/I] book if a similar approach was taken for its interpretation. You can either interpret the Bible as it appears and find it is in error, or interpret the Bible in light of science and find that it is, [I]unremarkably[/I], consistent with our knowledge of the world. Perhaps worse, if the Bible appears to be in error without science to show you [I]how[/I] to interpret it, perhaps you should be wary about drawing conclusions using the Bible when you have no science to guide you in what it is talking about. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Who Was Adam? A Creation Model Approach to the Origin of Man by Hugh Ross
Top
Bottom